I'm not sure what you think is "really going on."
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 1:24 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > That sounds like a cop-out to me related to what's really going > on. > >> On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Tutkowski, Mike <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> >> wrote: >> >> As far as I understand, cloudstack/cloudstack is only being proposed to help >> with developer workflow and CI. >> >> To my understanding, all code that goes in there will end up back in the >> canonical ASF CloudStack repo (and, as such, be mirrored to >> apache/cloudstack). >> >> This is simply a workaround to help solve developer workflow and CI issues >> that we couldn't due to lack of privileges on the current repo. >> >> I do not believe anyone on the PMC is talking about forking CloudStack and >> going off in a different direction. >> ________________________________________ >> From: Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> >> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull >> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) >> >> Hi Sebastien, >> >> >> [..] >>>> >>>> Hi Sebastien, >>>> >>>> Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board. >>>> >>>> The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the >>>> ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that >>>> there were more than a few board members that were a bit concerned >>>> at the prospect of Apache Cloudstack forking and starting a new >>>> GitHub organization, so I’m here now to discuss. >>> >>> We are not forking. In the sense that the canonical repo is at the ASF >>> and mirrored on apache/cloudstack. >> >> OK, good though based on the rest of your replies, I actually see >> the opposite being said. Also “we” is the relative word here, which >> I’ll get back to later in this message. >> >>> >>> The cloudstack org on github existed and was empty, one of us contacted >>> github and we got the “control” of it. >>> >>>> >>>> I’m sorry that you are unhappy with the lack of access to GitHub >>>> facilities, however I’m confused, the ASF does provide mirroring, >>>> active GitHub issue, >>> >>> As far as I know we cannot use github issues. >>> [..snip..] >>> To close PRs you need to make a commit. >> [..snip..] >>> Be able to use labels >>> Be able to setup our own triggers/hooks >> >> David Nalley can speak to this as I’m not sure if you can or >> cannot or if infra@ is providing this. Thanks for stating this. >> >>> >>> >>>> PMC desires and if so can you state that? I remember seeing a request >>>> that you wanted the ability to close pull requests and to be part of >>>> the experiment going on with the Whimsy PMC - >>> >>> Indeed, and I (we) never heard back. >> >> Right - that’s probably b/c it wasn’t discussed with the board >> until our last meeting which just happened yesterday. It’s >> my reading of the tea leaves that the experiment, while considered >> going in the right direction with Whimsy, is not open to other >> PMCs. It’s possible that we may as a board decide that further >> response is needed, but until that happens or if that doesn’t happen >> you can take my response until then. >> >>> [..snip..] >> >>> >>>> The other thing is - is the new Cloudstack GitHub organization the >>>> result of a subset of the PMC going off and doing this - >>> >>> I am not sure why you say subset. Let’s try to avoid polemics. >> >> I’m not trying to attack. >> >> I asked a simple question - how many/who in the Apache CloudStack PMC >> is intent on using this new Cloudstack GitHub organization? Not an >> attack, a question that I still don’t have an answer to. >> >> I also wanted to gauge whether there are others on the PMC that will >> speak up. I’ll continue waiting to hear more about that. >> >>> [..snip..] >>> Again, this is not about leaving the ASF. This is about accessing >>> productive tools and making use of them to their fullest. >>> >>>> Finally, as for the Apache Cloudstack PMC - for the PMC the policy of >>>> the ASF is that the canonical repository at the moment is on ASF >>>> hardware. >>> >>> And we would like the ASF to reconsider this. >> >> Put bluntly, the decision is no, and it is in the hands of the ASF Infra@ >> and based on >> discussions I’ve seen on public lists there and on board@ and part of the >> board >> meeting yesterday, Infra@ is not opening up the Whimsy experiment to other >> PMCs >> as of yet. They aren’t ready to declare an SLA; they aren’t ready for >> potential >> other PMCs to ask to use it too and for others to start thinking that >> capability >> is anything near operational. David Nalley can fill in more. >> >>> >>>> There are not any approved policies for external forks being the >>>> canonical >>>> repo, especially those in another GitHub organization not managed by the >>>> ASF. There is an experiment in the Apache Whimsy PMC to experiment with >>>> GitHub as the canonical repo for an apache/* org project. That is still >>>> an >>>> experiment and not widely offered by ASF infra to all PMCs. >>> >>> Are other projects than Whimsy being allowed to experiment ? >> >> Not at this time. >> >>> [..snip..] >>> >>> And just to clarify, you are acting here as “the board” ? Meaning the >>> board asked you to get on dev@ and talk with our community after seeing >>> our report ? >>> I am asking because the PMC has not received an official response from >>> the board based on our report (and annexed interim report). >> >> I am one of 9 Directors, but I believe if you’d like to test the waters >> that >> I have support of other board members in asking these questions based on >> the >> meetings yesterday. And as one of the Directors of the board and a >> long-time >> ASF’er, I’m here also as a concerned member since some actions that I have >> seen >> by Cloudstack related to this GitHub external organization imply to me >> that there >> is something more than meets the eye here. >> >> Let’s keep discussing, hopefully with more participation from the >> community besides >> the two of us. >> >> Cheers, >> Chris >> >>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Chris >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> >>>> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> >>>> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 3:15 AM >>>> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> >>>> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack >>>> pull >>>> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...) >>>> >>>>> Hi Chris, >>>>> >>>>> We have never met but i recognize your name from members only ASF >>>>> threads. >>>>> >>>>> For the benefit of others on this list it is useful to mention that you >>>>> are a member of the ASF board. >>>>> >>>>> The PMC has filed its quarterly report for march, as well as an >>>>> interim >>>>> report about a month ago. The interim report was acknowledged by Sam >>>>> Ruby >>>>> couple days ago only. >>>>> >>>>> I am assuming that the board will discuss it at its monthly meeting and >>>>> that we will hear from the board then. >>>>> >>>>> Other than that the discussions are active on dev@ , but roughly we >>>>> feel >>>>> that we are being hurt by lack of access to github facilities. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> -Sebastien >>>>> >>>>>> On 17 Mar 2016, at 00:04, Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry about my crude way of filing a PR for this, but I heard >>>>>> information about the Apache Cloudstack PMC actively >>>>>> discussing managing the project with GitHub as the primary source >>>>>> in a different organization than the github.com/apache/ org. >>>>>> >>>>>> Can someone clarify this for me? Clearly wearing my board hat, >>>>>> this is not something we allow for any of our ASF projects. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Chris “board hat on” Mattmann >
